That was quite impressive, you spent the whole time bemoaning celebrities that you failed to point out why you would have the right to film someone against their wishes in a private establishment.

Police should wear a cam because they are individuals in a profession that is going to put them in a situation at some point where we need to know what happens. Not want to know. They are going to be put into a position where they might have to fire their gun or use other physical force. We need to know if that's justified or not. It's a way of watching the watchers. It's a way for the Police to get some vindication when they are falsely accused of doing something wrong. There's so much benefit to it as a public servant that it makes sense. We don't require them to wear it home.

Performers are being a bit ridiculous in not wanting to be recorded, but I do kind of understand it. They don't want to be distracted with flashes during a performance, they don't want their material leaked and stolen online, they don't wan't a joke taken seriously that was highly inappropriate. They know it's inappropriate but a good comedian might tell it anyway to emphasize a point, shock people. They don't want it taken out of context.

You only want to record them. Take a step back and think about it for a second. Do you have to allow me into your house with a video camera and record everything you do? Maybe, but you sure don't have to let me. You don't even have to let a police officer into your home with a camera, they would need a warrant. So why you as a public citizen who rented a space can't deny people from entering your rented venue can't deny it.

Now you go and learn how to properly debate instead of skirting an issue and changing the subject.

While that's a valid argument the same could be said for iOS. http://researchcenter.paloalto... http://www.forbes.com/sites/th...

What phone are you using? Microsoft phone? Blackberry?

To get a secure phone you would probably need one that is not a smart phone. We should all know that any device with a proper OS is likely to have a security flaw that can be exploited. The problem is that users are uneducated on this problem. They store personal information, banking details, everything on a phone.

It's a user problem not an iOS, Android problem. Stop trying to fan flames on something that every manufacture has a problem with.

Also Samsung should at this point can the whole S line of phones and rebrand.

Waiting for VR to get 4K resolution is silly. It's like waiting for TV's to get 8K resolution then 12K and so on before you start selling them. Yeah you will get there eventually but do you need it? People thought TV was fine with 480 for years. Yes it will be better, yes it will increase what you can do with it, but that doesn't take away what can be done now in it. Which is very cool stuff. Using it for Autocad work to see a design before it's finished, watching a movie(granted at a lower resolution some people might not enjoy that) in a huge theater, with friends who live across the world. Playing a video game and being able to look around your surroundings. You can do all of these things now with the current resolution. Granted resolutions aren't the greatest, and like you said, rendering right now at higher resolutions is very taxing. It will be just around the corner though and Apple from this statement are ignoring all that, not because the tech isn't at 4k, but because it will disconnect you from the world. The same thing people said about iphones, computers, TVs and countless other things.

Even with VR in it's infancy it's still amazing technology, and it's something that could drive sales of hardware in the future.

My point wasn't that they should partner up, it was more that they couldn't even do that. If they started today they would be behind and no innovating. That was my point. The fact that he is even commenting on it makes the technology at least worth looking into, but he doesn't want to because why? It's not a form of connecting people? Like using a computer, iphone or what ever has been described as in the past?

He's saving face calling it a shitty tech rather than admit that they didn't invest in any kind of research.

Why would he start supporting VR now, they are late to the bus. Microsoft, google have already started partners with companies or are working on their own thing. Apple is really late to the party and everyone has partnered up. Who are they going to get on board with? Valve? Unlikely.

So you have them with likely little R&D into the subject two major companies with offerings already out there. If Apple jumps on it now it makes them look weak. They were late to the party, they weren't courageous or innovative. Things they want to be known for. Using the human contact things such bullshit to try and drive attention away from the fact that they missed an opportunity. They aren't going to start now and be innovative, there's enough buzz on the pixels VR capabilities, the Gear VR, the Vive and Rift. They would be a 4th player to the party and they don't want that image.

This is what damage control looks like.

I don't think it's like the 1000-in-one type kits. t's quite a bit different, though you did point out something it's exactly like, Lego Mindstorm. It's no different than that. As for if this will take off or not? Well google is heavily used in the classroom for education in north america, and I could see that being leveraged to expand education programming for this. Schools love lego mindstorm and this seems like a step to overtake that market. I don't see anyone buying it really for home use, as a gift really but in school they will eat that up.

Even with a non functioning spine it could increase the life span of an individual if they wish, by keeping the body going. Muscle degenerating diseases as far as I know(I'm not a doctor) typically kill you. This could extend peoples lives even without an intact spinal chord. It would be a huge breakthrough on a lot of levels even if not fully successful.

That is to say it works at all. I'm also skeptical of it working, at least in the first attempt. I'm just saying the spinal thing might not detract everyone from perusing it if it did.

With a finger print scan you could limit the number of scans before you lock out that mode of authentication. You then have to verify with an actual password. There should be no way to brute force the fingerprint scanner. You can maybe get 6-10 through before it should lock out, that's all assuming your database even has something close to what's stored in the phone.

For any kind of laws of robotics to work the machines would have to be intelligent enough for them to matter. They would have to understand what was living and what wasn't. While that could be done on some level, machines that work in factories are stupid. They are calibrated and programmed to run a specific routine, that is all. That is why there is a specific set of safety protocols that are used to maintain these machines, which appears to have not been followed in this case. It is unfortunate, and sad, but it was human error.

That can be a driving factor but even if they copyright expires publishing of said materials can still continue. There are plenty of free domain books that get sold by major publishers that make money. It's not like the money train has to stop once copyright has expired. Live performances of music and so on can generate lots of income.

The way that releasing copyright in a reasonable amount of time can help creativity is that people could use the beat track and write new lyrics. They could pull out samples and work them into other derivative works as well. Full covers could be done in a different tempo and style that would be new and exciting. As an example https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2Fm3lF2qEA2cw it's the same but totally different at the same time.

Locking in copyright over a long period of time can stifle creativity.

The problem with a short copyright on music is this though. You have a new and upcoming band who hasn't had a breakthrough. They produce an awesome song or sound and it's just not caught on yet. Some major label finds it after it's gone past it's copyright and hands it over to one of the artists they have commissioned they produce it and make millions while the original creator of the content is stuck with a thumb up their nose wondering why the hell do they even bother. In that sense a low copyright on music and other materials can be harmful to the creator. Cutting a good balance is hard, but 70 years is way too long and so is 50 for that matter. Something that would give a 20 year old a good shot would be nice, say 10-20 years somewhere in there. That would be good for everyone. New artists could use the material that basically influenced them as a kid and the artists music has usually ran it's course by then. 3 years is too short.

I think a lot of these problems are that it was an illegal market with people probably using a properly secured TOR connection so that they couldn't be traced. They got bored of what they were doing and said "HOLY SHIT, there's 12 million here, untraceable" so instead of the normal walk away, they took the money and walked away. You are going to run into this in any illegal venture, with untraceable currency, where the operator is unknown. Anyone shocked by this needs to give their head a shake. Don't drop a crap ton of money, to someone you don't know, who has no real incentive to help you out. You don't even need a regulatory body, just someone you can hold accountable. You are never going to get someone to hold accountable in a market like that because, well they will be held legally accountable as well.

Hilarious indeed.

I agree it is useless, I wouldn't even say it's almost completely useless. I do see the appeal in doing it though, doing crazy hacks like that can be fun. So I would say it was for entertainment value. It is interesting to see that the Nintendo could handle any kind of video like that.

But yes very useless.

I would say it was more of a proof of concept. The developers go into detail on how they were going to get the pi to stream, convert and write new frames to the cart.
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.ycombinator.com%2Fi...

It seems like it's quite possible with enough time you could do it, but why would you. They proved a concept and there's not much point in continuing really.
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.ycombinator.com%2Fi...

You are right, you have to weigh the pro's and con's of it. My point was more on par with that there is a need beyond illegal activities when it comes to online transactions and bitcoin. Most use case scenarios people would still be using credit card or something with similar features. Credit Card companies are awesome at charge backs and fraud cases.

I would say that illegal activity is a large part of it, but I do think it serves an important purpose. If everyday buying of bitcoins wasn't more expensive than using my credit card on a website(try buying bitcoins online it's expensive) I would be all over it. Private transaction without the worry of someone stealing my credit information. Someone online can only fleece me out of what I put in without linking to an account with a credit card of bank account attached. There are other options in this area though. Also while I'm not into illegal activities I don't necessarily want people tracking my every movement online.

Say if I had wanted to donate money to wikileaks back when credit cards were rejected. I'm not doing anything illegal by support that site but my credit card wouldn't be accepted. Paypal will hose you on anything if you aren't careful just look at what happened to Notch when minecraft started pulling in mad cash.

I don't want to be limited just because someone THINKS I'm doing something illegal.

http://rt.com/usa/214007-datac...
http://www.escapistmagazine.co...